The present invention describes an apparatus and method for mixing and disintegrating materials in test tubes, particularly for those materials that may be difficult to disintegrate, such as tissues. Devices for these purposes are described in U.S. Pat. Nos. 3,819,158; 4,202,634; 4,295,613; 4,883,644; 4,118,801; 4,125,335; 4,305,668; 4,555,183; 4,747,693, 5,708,861, and 5,769,538.
The most common test tube disrupters use tube vibration technology. Tube vibration technology involves a vibrating surface against which test tubes are held by the operator. Vibration of the surface induces vibration of the contents of the tubes. Tube vibration disrupters are simple devices that have several drawbacks. They provide low power and are only effective for disruption of cells and tissues of low hardness. Additionally, they require that the operator have their hand in physical contact with the test tubes, thus subjecting them to the same physical vibrations, which may cause discomfort and increases the potential for receiving injury.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,769,538 discloses a more advanced tube striking technology to produce vibrations. A popular brand of disruptor or BULLET BLENDER® uses tube striking technology. The advantages of tube striking technology over tube vibration are that multiple tubes may be processed at once, and the operator need not remain in physical contact with the tubes during disruption. However, these striking-style disrupters have several drawbacks.
The transfer of the energy of the strike to the contents of the tube may be inefficient, being dissipated by the liquid media within the tube. This causes an increase in power usage and a decrease in effectiveness. This drawback is particularly disadvantageous when using larger test tubes or when disrupting harder tissues.
Strong periodic strikes cause significant vibration, which necessitates the use of vibration dampeners. This is particularly important for hard tissues, such as heart or kidney, which require strong strikes to adequately disrupt. These dampeners increase the weight and cost of the disrupters and increase the rigidity of connections between the parts. These strong strikes also increase the chance of destroying the test tube.
Tube strikers are extremely loud, and require expensive, large housings with inner sound isolation to dampen noise.
All of the above drawbacks limit the number of potential applications and increase the structural complexity of the devices and increase their weight, size, and production cost, and are particularly disadvantageous for disruption of larger test tubes and harder tissues.